Statute Comparison
| State Statute | Attributes Compared to CFAA | Attributes Contrasted to CFAA | Report on Effectiveness in Its State |
| Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), | ECPA closely relates to CFAA where the two laws prohibit access to unauthorized stored electronic communications information. ECPA also relates to CFAA where both sanctions criminal are based on the jurisdiction when considering committing frauds, computer damage, passwords trafficking, threats to damaging a computer, and conspiracy for violations | While ECPA is specific to computer frauds and damaging computer data, CFAA introduces trespassing of commercial or government data. | Both laws are comprehensive enough in defining threats, damages, and trespass, which are involved in breaching a computer environment (It.ojp.gov, 2019). |
| Comprehensive Crime Control Act of (CCCA) 1984. | CCCA featured some of the earlier introductions of CFAA since it introduced secret service jurisdictions, revised Armed Career Criminal Act and Reform Act, and most importantly, it expressed application of credit card fraud and introduced computer fraud narrative. | Unlike CFAA, CCCA did not detail the utility of credit card fraud and computer fraud (Itlaw.in, 2019). Lack of detail presented shortages in the entire law given the categories of breach. | While CCCA inspired the development of more comprehensive acts, it remains effective in defining the extent of computer-related incidences (Congress.gov, 2019). |
| Information Technology Act (ITA) 2000 | ITA relates to CFAA in describing computer offences, which involves hacking, receiving of stolen information, tampering with computer source documents, cheating, and using computer resources | However, ITA involves expressions of acts of cyber terrorism, publishing of images containing sexual acts, and misrepresentations of interests | ITA is a larger law as compared to CFAA. However, CFAA remains specific to the nature of offences, which largely circulates around the noun damage. |
Actual Use Case
| Name of Case | Statute Reference | Judicial Opinion | Statute Success |
| Lane v. Facebook, Inc. (2010) | No. 09-3845 RS; March 17, 2010 | Judge Richard Seeborg argued that Facebook Beacon resulted in Facebook posting user content online without their consent. | Combination of EFCA and CCCA have remained a success at minimizing cases where corporate organizations can use user data for business benefits. |
References
Congress.gov. (2019). S.1762 – 98th Congress (1983-1984): Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/98th-congress/senate-bill/1762
It.ojp.gov. (2019). Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. Retrieved from https://it.ojp.gov/PrivacyLiberty/authorities/statutes/1285
Itlaw.in, I. (2019). IT Act 2000, Information Technology Act 2000, Bare Act, Information Technology Law. Retrieved from https://www.itlaw.in/
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more